The Justices spar over the constitutionality of the death penalty

[GMDino]

(07-07-2015, 03:59 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: An infant can't feasibly survive outside the womb without someone to care for it. Kinda the same as when it's inside its mother.

It's all semantical BS to support a stance.

I was pretty mature at a young age. I could have gotten by completely on my own when i was somewhere in the 3-5 year old range. If the argument is survival, maybe the cutoff for abortions should be...let's say for argument...6 years old?

(07-07-2015, 07:50 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So you don't see the difference between an embryo/fetus surviving outside the womb and an infant or a toddler? Does the normal, healthy infant need assistance breathing? Their heart pumping? Do they require their nutrients to be given via stomach pump (essentially) or are they able to ingest them? These are the things that would be needed to give a healthy embryo/fetus prior to the third trimester even a chance to live, and in most cases it wouldn't succeed. You call it BS Semantics, but your position here is extremely fallacious.

Both of my children were born prematurely.  26 weeks.  If you'd like to know the amount of time and money and effort it takes to keep a baby alive at that point I'd be glad to explain.

I support that abortion is a horrible, terrible decision that must be made by the mother and (hopefully) father of the fetus.  But lets stop pretending that a fetus (baby/child) can just "survive" at any point so it the exact same thing as killing a 6 year old.